New Stadium or Revamp Old Trafford | Aim is to build 100k seater stadium

[RopersReturn]

The West Ham stadium took 3 years, Emirates was 2, Wembley took 4, but you also need to bear in mind that the workforce is very different now, there is an acute shortage in the construction industry in part because of a certain vote in 2016

Couldn’t they build it in prefabricated blocks, and ship it over from Germany along with self assemble instructions?

 

[Red in STL]

Couldn’t they build it in prefabricated blocks, and ship it over from Germany along with self assemble instructions?

I'd prefer it to be Danish, after all they are Lego experts

 

[DomesticTadpole]

I'd prefer it to be Danish, after all they are Lego experts

I'd help build it if it was in Lego bricks.

 

[Fugeeface]

I’d be interested to see how much research has been done into how much money this will generate for the economy.

The NHS is an absolute shit-show currently, along with other services in this country. Surely tax payer’s money would be better spent on them.

The NHS always was a "shit-show" and will remain to be this way, no matter how much money you throw at it.
But generally speaking, I agree. Taxes should never go to private entities like NGOs, the royal family or to a football club.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

The NHS always was a "shit-show" and will remain to be this way, no matter how much money you throw at it.
But generally speaking, I agree. Taxes should never go to private entities like NGOs, the royal family or to a football club.

They aren't giving United any money. The money is there for regeneration of the area, it just means planning permission will be given more easily. The money was likely there anyway, but redtape has always been an issue in a lot of these projects.

 

[Fugeeface]

They aren't giving United any money. The money is there for regeneration of the area, it just means planning permission will be given more easily. The money was likely there anyway, but redtape has always been an issue in a lot of these projects.

I understand that. The regeneration of the area benefits United and less red tape and all that benefits United, too.
It is also inappropriate to have the "money there anyway" while waiting for a football club to be the initiator of an area's "regeneration" - a term that isn't very precise.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

They aren't giving United any money. The money is there for regeneration of the area, it just means planning permission will be given more easily. The money was likely there anyway, but redtape has always been an issue in a lot of these projects.

Yes, that's how I've understood it.

I keep seeing it being implied that 'wealthy Man United / billionaire owners' getting Tax payers money from government hand outs.

But, as far as I've read, what you say is the actual truth - the club are funding all the football related work, but are trying to get the government / local councils to do their part when it comes to funding regeneration of local city areas. None of those areas are ones that the club should - or even could - pay to do over, as they don't own them. So well within their rights to negotiate with the councils / government to help get things done.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

I understand that. The regeneration of the area benefits United and less red tape and all that benefits United, too.
It is also inappropriate to have the "money there anyway" while waiting for a football club to be the initiator of an area's "regeneration" - a term that isn't very precise.

Think the councils involved have been wanting to regenerate the area, but why do it if the stadium in the centre of it was not up to standard, once SJR got involved and wanted to sort the stadium out it made it easier to follow through with everything. As I also said if the red tape can be removed and planning permission be given a lot quicker it should be sorted a lot quicker. There is so much can be done with this area to link it to Manchester better via transport links and if there is also a university involved and other hotels and businesses it will generate more jobs.

 

[Red in STL]

Think the councils involved have been wanting to regenerate the area, but why do it if the stadium in the centre of it was not up to standard, once SJR got involved and wanted to sort the stadium out it made it easier to follow through with everything. As I also said if the red tape can be removed and planning permission be given a lot quicker it should be sorted a lot quicker. There is so much can be done with this area to link it to Manchester better via transport links and if there is also a university involved and other hotels and businesses it will generate more jobs.

It's not just about red tape, United have to make a decision on what it is they are going to do, that has a direct impact on how the rest moves forward

 

[stubie]

I wonder if the club could get the potential capacity to 100,500 thus ensuring you would get 6 figure attendances regularly

 

[U-N-I-T-E-D]

I wonder if the club could get the potential capacity to 100,500 thus ensuring you would get 6 figure attendances regularly

Never thought about that. It would be annoying to have a 100,000 and never get attendances over 99,500 because of fan separation.

 

[MadDogg]

I wonder if the club could get the potential capacity to 100,500 thus ensuring you would get 6 figure attendances regularly

I would certainly hope we'd be looking to go a little over the 100k, so that anything that closes a small section would allow us to stay over that figure. I'd think it should be a couple thousand over though, rather than just 500.

 

[Lord Zlatan]

Changed my mind on this. Did a trip on my own for the last game of season, year for before last. It was a cracking weekend weather wise and i did the stadium tour for about the fifth time. The history in the place is simply magical and i felt after that how could we even consider moving. But the club needs a complete reset and a statement to say we are back among the elite. A 100,000 seater stadium would do that. They could incorporate a lot of that history in OT into the new to provide a link to that history.

 

[giggs-beckham]

SJR won't be alive to see this probably and it's too far in the future to be excited about. 10+years?

 

[astracrazy]

The NHS always was a "shit-show" and will remain to be this way, no matter how much money you throw at it.
But generally speaking, I agree. Taxes should never go to private entities like NGOs, the royal family or to a football club.

It's not going to a private entity.......what are you talking about?

 

[Leg-End]

SJR won't be alive to see this probably and it's too far in the future to be excited about. 10+years?

I would imagine they want a shorter time frame than that, but it could easily end up longer with the mountains of red tape they will have to wade through before they even dig the first hole.

 

[Infra-red]

SJR won't be alive to see this probably and it's too far in the future to be excited about. 10+years?

I would imagine they want a shorter time frame than that, but it could easily end up longer with the mountains of red tape they will have to wade through before they even dig the first hole.

Construction of Wembley took 4.5 years, while Spurs' stadium was just under 4 years. As you say though, before you even get to the construction phase there is a lot of work to do, which could easily take as long as the actual construction (from officially announcing the project to opening the stadium, Wembley took 9 years, Tottenham took 11 years) . They haven't even decided whether they want a new stadium or a refurb, yet - that decision was supposed to have been announced last November, but has been delayed until the summer.

 

[Fugeeface]

It's not going to a private entity.......what are you talking about?

United will benefit and is seen as the catalyst for the "regeneration" of the area. This is help from the government.

I'm against help from the government that benefits private entities as long as the people that need help do not get any from the same degenerate and corrupt government.

Unless you want to argue that United won't benefit from the "regeneration", whatever that means.

 

[astracrazy]

United will benefit and is seen as the catalyst for the "regeneration" of the area. This is help from the government.

I'm against help from the government that benefits private entities as long as the people that need help do not get any from the same degenerate and corrupt government.

Unless you want to argue that United won't benefit from the "regeneration", whatever that means.

Of course they will and so will the local communities, local economy and national economy. The stadium going ahead doesn't rely on this though, United could still build the stadium if they wanted to couldn't they.

Do you expect United to pay for the area to be upgraded then? Or do you not get what ROI means from an economic perspective?

 

[Red in STL]

United will benefit and is seen as the catalyst for the "regeneration" of the area. This is help from the government.

I'm against help from the government that benefits private entities as long as the people that need help do not get any from the same degenerate and corrupt government.

Unless you want to argue that United won't benefit from the "regeneration", whatever that means.

So you are against the Government putting money in to the NHS because it shouldn't benefit private entities?

 

[Duffman2]

I'd help build it if it was in Lego bricks.

As a Swede I feel offended that IKEA hasnt been proposed yet

 

[DomesticTadpole]

As a Swede I feel offended that IKEA hasnt been proposed yet

Nothing like a bit of flatpack.

 

[stubie]

I would certainly hope we'd be looking to go a little over the 100k, so that anything that closes a small section would allow us to stay over that figure. I'd think it should be a couple thousand over though, rather than just 500.

Back when we had a capacity of 55,300 (1996-2000) attendances in the league were usually over 55,000

 

[Red in STL]

Back when we had a capacity of 55,300 (1996-2000) attendances in the league were usually over 55,000

Back in the days before then, most games were not all ticket, before I had a LMTB I never had an issue getting in to home games, just queued up at the turnstile and paid as did most other fans

 

[Antisocial]

Robert Peston on his ITV show last night was framing this as the government giving public money to United for building the stadium and trying to entice his guests to comment on that basis (which they did, the Tory was a Liverpool fan so was doubly-happy to get some kicks in) - I guess that will be the narrative going forward if even an established journalist (albeit an Arsenal fan) can't be bothered to check the details.

 

[Fugeeface]

So you are against the Government putting money in to the NHS because it shouldn't benefit private entities?

Quite frankly, yes. The NHS is a systemic disaster. The government can't run anything. Wherever it does, things fail.

It is an European issue. The standards have fallen so much in the last decade that most services remind me of experiences I had in so called third world countries. The so called first world is falling apart.
Germany - where I currently reside - is an embarrassment. Trains, doctors, hospitals, appointments, security, economy - terrible.

I'm not an advocate for predator-capitalism and I don't believe that privatization in itself is the way to go. But the way it's going is a disaster. The NHS is a disaster. The governments - left or right, same difference - are degenerate and corrupt. No government serves it's people. Until that changes, nothing changes.

 

[Red in STL]

Quite frankly, yes. The NHS is a systemic disaster. The government can't run anything. Wherever it does, things fail.

It is an European issue. The standards have fallen so much in the last decade that most services remind me of experiences I had in so called third world countries. The so called first world is falling apart.
Germany - where I currently reside - is an embarrassment. Trains, doctors, hospitals, appointments, security, economy - terrible.

I'm not an advocate for predator-capitalism and I don't believe that privatization in itself is the way to go. But the way it's going is a disaster. The NHS is a disaster. The governments - left or right, same difference - are degenerate and corrupt. No government serves it's people. Until that changes, nothing changes.

Good luck trying to see a GP in the UK then given that every one of them is eiither self employed or a member of a private entity and always have been.

And if you want to see what non-Government healthcare looks like then visit the US, as someone who has experienced both I can tell you that for all it's faults European healthcare is far superior and won't either bankrupt you or kill you because you can't afford treatment

 

[Fugeeface]

Good luck trying to see a GP in the UK then given that every one of them is eiither self employed or a member of a private entity and always have been.

And if you want to see what non-Government healthcare looks like then visit the US, as someone who has experienced both I can tell you that for all it's faults European healthcare is far superior and won't either bankrupt you or kill you because you can't afford treatment

I lived there for a decade and the American healthcare system provided better care than the NHS. Your generalisations are naive at best. The reason behind your "bankrupt" talking point is mostly due to people not having any health insurance. Some can't afford it, others choose not to have any, as crazy as that is.

That was then. Today I wouldn't call either of those systems "healthcare". America's is the most corrupt and the European is not functioning. I lived in France, the Netherlands and now Germany and in those three countries the healthcare system is in serious crisis.
The NHS is a different system to mainland Europe and I don't know a single person that has one good thing to say about staying in a hospital in London.